[Ecommerce] Australia: business method patents

[Manon Ress]

Australia:  Patents for business systems
Rothnie's blog
http://homepage.mac.com/wrothnie/iblog/C688984015/index.html

Patents

http://homepage.mac.com/wrothnie/iblog/C149316833/E1135187081/index.html
QUOTE
On 26 May 2005, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for
Industry, Tourism and Resources announced that the Commonwealth
Government has accepted 10 of ACIP's 11 recommendations in relation to
the patenting of business systems.

Just to recap, it is clear under Australian law that a "business method"
may be patentable provided it is a mode or manner of achieving an end
result which is an artificially created state of affairs of utility in a
field of economic endeavour: Welcome Real-Time SA v Catuity (2001) 51
IPR 327, here, applying CCOM v Jeijing (1994) 28 IPR 481, here, and the
NRDC case (1959) 102 CLR 232; 1A IPR 52, here. It must also be novel,
inventive etc. like any other patentable subject matter!

ACIP, in its principal recommendation, had accepted that this should
continue to be the case and the Government has accepted that. Given the
concerns raised, however, the Government intends to continue monitoring
the issue "closely". For example, the Government has accepted ACIP's
recommendation that IP Australia provide ACIP with an annual report
about the number and significance of applications for business system
patents. This has apparently been complicated to date by the inadequate
classification system, but it is expected this will be remedied when the
new international classification system is introduced on 1 January 2006.

ACIP made a number of other recommendations designed to improve
examination of business system applications and improving understanding
about patenting. These were accepted. In particular, the Government
noted that IP Australia has improved its non-patent literature searching
techniques, is involved in benchmarking its practices with a number of
overseas offices and will be introducing Technology Workshops for local
industry and practitioners to work through controversial areas such as
genetics and business methods.

The recommendation that was not accepted was the recommendation to
develop a local classification system. This was considered unnecessary
in view of the new international classification system to be introduced
next year.

The media release is here, the full Government Response here and ACIP's
report here.

--
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC PO Box 19367,
Washington, DC 20036, USA Tel.:  +1.202.387.8030, fax: +1.202.234.5176

Consumer Project on Technology in Geneva, 1 Route des  Morillons, CP
2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland. Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology in London, 24 Highbury Crescent, London,
N5 1RX, UK. Tel:+44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252. Mob:+44(0)790 386 4642. Fax:
+44(0)207 354 0607